Care organisations role as intermediaries between the authorities and the marginalised in crisis management

Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/).Social service providers work to alleviate social disadvantages, which may particularly loom during crises. These organisations have a close understanding of the needs of their clients. However, this knowledge is rarely taken into account in tailoring crisis measures, which may lead to increased vulnerability and create additional suffering. In this paper, we take a novel look at the role of care organisations as intermediaries between their clients and the authorities in representing the needs and capabilities of vulnerable people and explore the factors hindering or facilitating this representation. We focused on care organisations in Europe and collected data from 32 interviews, followed by 5 workshops and an international colloquium with 6 language-based discussion groups with participants from organisations offering care services to socially marginalised individuals. The results demonstrate the role these organisations had in advocating their clients' needs to the authorities to adapt the crisis measures accordingly (“bottom-up approach”), and communicating official information about the risks and government rules to their clients (“top-down approach”). We found effective mediation to stem from long-term, trusting client relationship to be able to reflect on clients’ needs, while the lack of collaboration protocol and tradition can be seen as the main barrier to inclusive crisis management. Networking with social care services to bring their expertise into crisis management systems is essential to promote the resilience of the diverse society.Care organisations role as intermediaries between the authorities and the marginalised in crisis managementpublishedVersio

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on socially marginalised women: Material and mental health outcomes

Alexandra Olson, Tor-Olav Naevestad, Kati Orru, Kristi Nero, Abriel Schieffelers, Sunniva Frislid Meyer, The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on socially marginalised women: Material and mental health outcomes, International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, Volume 93, 2023, 103739, ISSN 2212-4209, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2023.103739 (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212420923002194)There is little knowledge about how the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted people who are socially marginalised, including individuals who face barriers when attempting to access services such as social safety nets, the labour market, or housing. There is even less understanding about women living under these circumstances. The aims of this study are therefore to examine the material and mental impacts of COVID-19 among socially marginalised women (compared with socially marginalised men) as well as influencing factors. The study is based on survey data (N = 304) involving people who are clients of social care organisations in thirteen European countries. The sample includes clients: a) living in their homes, b) in facilities, and c) on the street and in temporary accommodations. Results indicate that although material impacts were not significantly different for female and male respondents, socially marginalised women have experienced more severe mental impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic than socially marginalised men. Female respondents have been significantly more worried about COVID-19 infection than men, and they report significantly more PTSD-symptoms related to the pandemic. Quantitative results indicate that these differences are related to the fact that the female respondents worry more about health risks (e.g. falling ill). Female respondents also seem to be harder hit mentally by the material impacts of COVID-19. Among the free text survey answers regarding the biggest problem for the respondents after the outbreak of the pandemic, the most prevalent reply (among both men and women) was related to material impacts of the pandemic (39% of the respondents), particularly the loss of work (65%). While women reported deterioration of social relations more often, men mentioned lacking access to services more frequently.publishedVersio

Three A's of social capital in crises: Challenges with the availability, accessibility and activatability of social support

Maira Schobert, Kati Orru, Friedrich Gabel, Kristi Nero, Peter Windsheimer, Margo Klaos, Tor-Olav Nævestad, The three A's of social capital in crises: Challenges with the availability, accessibility and activatability of social support, International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, Volume 92, 2023, 103704, ISSN 2212-4209, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2023.103704.(https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221242092300184X)Social capital has become a major factor for analysing vulnerabilities and resilience in the context of disaster studies in recent years. Usually, it is studied along its three forms of bonding, bridging, and linking social capital, and it is often framed as a static characteristic that a person either has at his or her disposal or not. Based on the results of case studies conducted in Germany and Estonia focusing on four different crises (floods in Germany; long-term disruption of electricity due to a major storm in Estonia; a cyber-attack in Estonia; as well as the COVID-19 pandemic in both countries) we claim that this description and analysis of social capital does not allow for a comprehensive understanding of all the challenges disaster management has to deal with to decrease vulnerabilities and increase resilience. Using qualitative content analysis, we present a heuristic framework which not only asks whether bonding, bridging, and linking social capital is available to individuals, but also whether social capital is accessible and activatable when responding to or recovering from a disaster. In doing so, the paper helps to improve the overall usability of official or unofficial social support to cope with crises.Three A's of social capital in crises: Challenges with the availability, accessibility and activatability of social supportpublishedVersio

Mechanisms behind COVID-19 scepticism among socially marginalised individuals in Europe

Homeless and materially disadvantaged people are considered particularly vulnerable to COVID-19 infection. So far, there is no systematic knowledge about how the homeless and materially disadvantaged people perceive the risks of COVID-19 and what factors influence the development of sceptical views and underestimation of dangers posed by the virus. The aim of our study is therefore to: (1) Explore COVID-19 risk perception of socially marginalised individuals, focusing on their assessment of the probability of getting infected by the virus and the perceived harmful consequences of the disease; and (2) examine the factors influencing COVID-19 risk beliefs of these individuals. We use cross-sectional survey data with 273 participants from eight countries and data from 32 interviews and five workshops with managers and staff of social care organisations in ten European countries. Our results indicate that among survey participants, 49% can be labelled COVID-19 sceptics with regard to probability of getting infected, and 38% with regard to harmful consequences of the disease. We find that COVID-19 scepticism is related to low levels of all types of social capital, low trust in information from authorities and being a minority. However, the most important predictor is the respondents’ general lack of concern about health risks. Additionally, the qualitative data indicates the multifaceted nature of COVID-19 scepticism, as it may relate to the origins of COVID-19, the probability of infection, its consequences and protective measures, among others. Improved understanding about factors influencing COVID-19 scepticism in these groups contributes to a better understanding of the information disorder during crises, and the ways in which this could be managed through policies against marginalisation, including in disaster risk reduction.</p

Self-imposed social isolation among clients of social care organisations in the COVID-19 pandemic

Although self-imposed social isolation is an important way of reducing the risk of COVID-19 infection, previous research indicates that this behaviour varies substantially between different groups and individuals. Socially marginalized people are generally less involved in protective health behaviours, but there are few studies of their COVID-19 protective behaviours. The aims of the paper are therefore to: 1) compare self-imposed social isolation to avoid COVID-19 among socially marginalized groups, and to 2) examine factors influencing this, focusing especially on the role of social capital, risk awareness and sources of information about COVID-19. The study is based on survey data (N = 173) from people who are clients of social care organisations in Estonia, Norway, Hungary and Portugal. The sample involves clients living: a) in their homes, b) in facilities, and c) on the street or under temporary arrangements. Results indicate that the level of social isolation among the marginalized groups is comparable to that of the general population in previous studies. As hypothesized, we find that respondents living on the street or under temporary arrangements engage in less self-imposed social isolation than e.g. the respondents living in their homes. We also find lower levels of risk awareness, social capital and trust in authorities' information about COVID-19 among people living on the street or under temporary arrangements. Only linking social capital and trust in authorities' information was significantly related to respondents’ social isolation, and not worry for COVID-19 infection. Thus, it seems that respondents largely self-isolated because of “duty” and not worry for infection

Resilience in care organisations:challenges in maintaining support for vulnerable people in Europe during the Covid-19 pandemic

The Covid‐19 pandemic has challenged the resilience of care organisations (and those dependent on them), especially when services are stopped or restricted. This study focuses on the experiences of care organisations that offer services to individuals in highly precarious situations in 10 European countries. It is based on 32 qualitative interviews and three workshops with managers and staff. The four key types of organisations reviewed largely had the same adaptation patterns in all countries. The most drastic changes were experienced by day centres, which had to suspend or digitise services, whereas night shelters and soup kitchens had to reorganise broadly their work; residential facilities were minimally affected. Given the drastic surge in demand for services, reliance on an overburdened (volunteer) workforce, and a lack of crisis plans, the care organisations with long‐term trust networks with clients and intra‐organisational cooperation adapted easier. The outcomes were worse for new clients, migrants, psychologically vulnerable people, and those with limited communicative abilities